Posts by Thrik

Oh yeah, I did play Soul Calibre 2 but I recall it being more like side-stepping.

I guess what I was thinking of is something that'd pretty much necessitate a split-screen view, with you having absolute control over your guy in the arena, maybe similar-looking to Assassin's Creed. That or some very clever camera work that only splits off when absolutely necessary (ie: very far apart).

I realise this stretches the definition of what a beat 'em up actually is, but it seems like it'd be a really interesting under-explored direction.

Depends on whether you mean moving on in the context of graphics or gameplay. 2D means the gameplay is going to be like a lot of other games.

Has a really good full 3D fighting game actually been made yet? I'm not really a follower of the genre. By full 3D I mean an entirely 3D fighting arena with a full range of movement, not just the use of polygons.

Yeah, I think the whole touch screen thing is good for a phone (remember that the iPod Touch is basically an iPhone with some of the applications removed), but I also don't really look at my player much while using it and so would find the touch screen thing kind of counter-intuitive.

If it's just the non-music aspect that intrigues you, hold on for a while. Lots of other companies are racing to get their own touch screen devices out, and Nokia's in particular showed a lot of promise when it was unveiled a short while ago. LG also has a good one coming out imminently, which has a 5-megapixel camera with proper flash (good for a phone).

I'd say it's a little overpriced for what it actually is. But then, that's what Apple do best -- they sell style. If you can justify that, it's entirely up to you.

It's not meant to be hell; that's our world after having been ruined by demons (from hell).

The trailer itself might not show much, but it does show that:

a) Tim Schafer is doing another game that's got a more 'hardcore' tone like Full Throttle did

b) The game will be violent, which isn't so common in a Tim Schafer game (a chance for more extreme humour)

Combined with Tim Schafer's 100% track record of making legendary games it's not hard to see why people are excited.

I suppose if you take the trailer at face value it might not be so intriguing. It doesn't show what Tim Schafer is best known for: making funny games with superb storylines. We're talking about the guy responsible for much of the dialogue and story of Monkey Island here.

This won't be a game that takes itself seriously, and I'll eat my own cock if it isn't good as fuck.

It's like saying your arse cheeks are yucky because they cover up your smelly arse hole, though.

It's just a part of the body, and if it weren't for the nonsense about the hygiene and it looking weird has been hammered into American youth from birth there wouldn't be a problem.

Weird how perspective can vary.

What're the chances they all had it done because they were told it was too tight, Ginger? If they're proud of it I guess they won't mind sharing.

I'm 20 too so I'd be one of them if I'd listened to the doctors. They all want stringing up.

Well, in all honesty there aren't. Not ones with any significant degree of prominence, anyway; medical conditions that genuinely require foreskin removal are pretty rare.

About 10 years ago there was actually misdiagnosis on a huge scale of an excessively-tight foreskin problem in the UK, and I think it's only really been resolved during the past several years.

Basically doctors cut off too many foreskins believing it was too tight, misdiagnosing normal tightness (perhaps influenced by parental pressure) as an actual tightness condition which is relatively very rare.

I myself was actually told I should have it snipped as it was too tight for my cock to come out of in my early years, but my parents didn't go for it and it did indeed loosen by itself a few years later. But if those doctors had had their way, I'd have no foreskin.

The medical boards and shit enforcing a harder stance on holding back circumcision for tightness is incidentally why the UK percentage has fallen from 10% to about 3%, incidentally. It's expected to imminently fall further to 2%.

Not sure if that's a factor in US circumcisions, but it's probably largely outweighed by the people just doing it for tradition's sake.

I think one overriding factor above all else here is that girls in the US expect a circumcised cock, and girls outside the US don't. I still think the choice should be made by the person themselves once they're older, as if they really want a circumcised cock to please the ladies that's not a decision their parents should make.

It has been, but a lot of Americans (Majority?) who get it done these days aren't jewish at all.

Yeah, I browse a few forums that a largely US-based audience, and the overwhelming majority of them said they'd been circumcised when such discussions came up. They also said they'd get their own sons circumcised because "everyone else does it" and "it's what girls expect", and not for religious reasons at all.

I've always found it really weird how such a developed country as the US continues to for the majority of cases do the same thing that they do in some really underdeveloped countries like Africa, chopping off genitalia and such (sounds like your program picked up on this too.

I don't think a lot of Americans actually realise that their country is pretty unique for this. To put it into perspective, while the US rate of circumcision is at least 60% (and was over 80% a decade or so ago), it's more like 3% in the UK and many other European countries.

I think it's largely a case of tradition and very widespread misconceptions (pretty much every health reason given for circumcision including 'hygiene' has been entirely smashed apart) that contribute to its continuation.

I personally think it's completely wrong to cut part of a person's genitals off until they're old enough to make the decision themselves. It might hurt a bit more when you're older, but then maybe that'll encourage you to take the decision seriously rather than bullshit social compliance. And of course CUTTING PART OF YOUR DICK OFF is then your own decision.

Yeah, I installed the demo a couple of days ago and had exactly the same shadow problem. Everything I could find in the various settings menus was set to 'on' or 'maximum', but no shadows were appearing properly.

It shouldn't be my hardware because I'm using the absolute latest drivers and a GeForce 8800 (GTX). Maybe it's a demo restriction, or a demo fuck-up?

[Blocked Image: http://serve.ryanjohnwilliams.com/images/schafer_games.jpg]

Awesome.

(video)

Yeah, annual releases in the high-end bracket are the norm and have been pretty much since 1999, but because NVIDIA kind of caught ATI with their pants down with the GeForce 8s and ATI still haven't come up with a contender for the most powerful card, there's really no need to push it forward a step just yet.

Obviously it's all rumour and speculation, but there's no logical reason for NVIDIA to push ahead a whole new generation of horsepower just yet.

There goes the tradition that's gone on since I was a boy.

As I said though:

Quote

The only thing I'd warn is that all rumours are heavily pointing towards NVIDIA bringing out a new card in the upper end of the GeForce 8 series this autumn, which will either provide a new product that's better value for money than the 8800 GTS or it'll drive the price of the existing models down.

Whatever you do, you'll benefit from waiting a little while.

Hello and welcome to this wondrous forum.

Hahaha, I still remember the first time I played Quake 4 and almost laughed out loud at the blatantly painted backgrounds. I mean it's all well and good having painted backgrounds, but not when stuff that's meant to move like smoke and stuff is in them.

Yeah, I can't see anyone being disappointed with an 8800 of any model. The whole range is extremely powerful.

The only thing I'd warn is that all rumours are heavily pointing towards NVIDIA bringing out a new card in the upper end of the GeForce 8 series this autumn, which will either provide a new product that's better value for money than the 8800 GTS or it'll drive the price of the existing models down.

I'd recommend waiting until then before making any decisions.

Seems like a bit of an unnecessary risk just in case you for whatever reason got stung or something. I usually find demos perfectly sufficient for trying out a game, combined with a bit of MetaCritic.

As long as you buy in the end I guess that's all well and good for the publishers/developers. I know a lot of people say they warez 'n' buy to sound all righteous and such but never actually do, though. Hopefully you're not one of those filthy animals.

You said you wanted a PCI card, but PCI graphics cards pretty much stopped being made over 10 years ago, so obviously you meant PCI-Express.

As such, you need a PCI-Express motherboard. These motherboards typically don't have an AGP slot, and have a PCI-Express (PCI-E) slot instead. So if your current card is an AGP card, you almost certainly don't have support for PCI-E, and thus can't really buy a modern card.

If you do have PCI-E support, I highly recommend you get the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS 320mb. This is one of NVIDIA's highest-end cards, and is extremely fast.

You should be able to get it for ~$300 online, however if you look hard you may find the 640mb version which is more desirable for around the $300 mark too. If you do, I recommend you get that version instead.

The only card more powerful than the GeForce 8800 GTS 640mb is realistically the GeForce 8800 GTX 768mb, which is a lot more expensive.

So in other words, with this card you'll be sitting in the top tier of graphics cards owned by the majority of people. Unless you use a really high resolution like 1920x1200 you probably wouldn't even need the additional horsepower of the GTX.

I'm really not convinced many people have actually suffered because of the activation process. I mean, do you personally know anyone who did? Because I sure didn't.

It was quite a well-known fact that the BioShock protection was solid for at least the first few weeks, and possibly a bit longer; indeed, I think it's possibly the most effective we've seen yet without resorting to nasty drivers and stuff.

It definitely accomplished its goal of stopping the initial warez flurry, for once demonstrating that those who really want to play the cracked game don't always necessarily end up doing so. I'm guessing a fair number of people got fed up waiting for a crack for weeks on end amongst all the hype and just ended up buying it.

I'm sure we'd all prefer a world without activation and stuff, but let's face it: PC gamers are as a general rule greedy as fuck, and happily flaunt the fact that they download the majority of their games illegally. 'Playing PC games' almost equates to 'downloading them illegally' for a lot of people, and surprisingly this goes for older people too (parents, grandparents, etc).

It's a culture of warez, and we've unfortunately got noone to blame for these stronger anti-warez measures but ourselves, no matter how much of an injustice we may make it out to be. It's either the publishers demand these measures be implemented or they withdraw from the PC market altogether, which in all honesty probably wouldn't hit their finances that hard if they piled those same resources back into the consoles.

I realise that some of you may be innocent of ware:- wait, who am I kidding? None of you are innocent of warez.

They said when it came out the activation process was largely to curb the 0-day warezing, which it did. They also said that the activation mechanism would almost certainly be removed or negated once it'd been out a while.